This paper proposes a generic construction of hierarchical identity-based identification (HIBI) protocols secure against impersonation under active and concurrent attacks in the standard model. The proposed construction converts a digital signature scheme existentially unforgeable against chosen message attacks, where the scheme has a protocol for showing possession of a signing key, not a signature. Our construction is based on the so-called certificate-based construction of hierarchical identity-based cryptosystems, and utilizes a variant of the well-known OR-proof technique to ensure the security against impersonation under active and concurrent attacks. We also present several concrete examples of our construction employing the Waters signature (EUROCRYPT 2005), and other signatures. As results, its concurrent security of each instantiation is proved under the computational Diffie-Hellman (CDH) assumption, the RSA assumption, or their variants in the standard model. Chin, Heng, and Goi proposed an HIBI protocol passively and concurrently secure under the CDH and one-more CDH assumption, respectively (FGIT-SecTech 2009). However, its security is proved in the random oracle model.

We study non-malleability of multiple public-key encryption (ME) schemes. The main difference of ME from the threshold public-key encryption schemes is that there is no dealer to share a secret among users; each user can independently choose their own public-keys; and a sender can encrypt a message under ad-hoc multiple public keys of his choice. In this paper we tackle non-malleability of ME. We note that the prior works only consider confidentiality of messages and treat the case that all public keys are chosen by honest users. In the multiple public-key setting, however, some application naturally requires non-malleability of ciphertexts under multiple public keys including malicious users'. Therefore, we study the case and have obtained the following results:·We present three definitions of non-malleability of ME, simulation-based, comparison-based, and indistinguishability-based ones. These definitions can be seen as an analogue of those of non-malleable public-key encryption (PKE) schemes. Interestingly, our definitions are all equivalent even for the “invalid-allowing” relations. We note that the counterparts of PKE are not equivalent for the relations.·The previous strongest security notion for ME, “indistinguishability against strong chosen-ciphertext attacks (sMCCA)” [1], does not imply our notion of non-malleability against chosen-plaintext attacks.·Non-malleability of ME guarantees that the single message indistinguishability-based notion is equivalent to the multiple-message simulation-based notion, which provides designers a fundamental benefit.·We define new, stronger decryption robustness for ME. A non-malleable ME scheme is meaningful in practice if it also has the decryption robustness.·We present a constant ciphertext-size ME scheme (meaning that the length of a ciphertext is independent of the number of public-keys) that is secure in our strongest security notion of non-malleability. Indeed, the ciphertext overhead (i.e., the length of a ciphertext minus that of a plaintext) is the combined length of two group elements plus one hash value, regardless of the number of public keys. Then, the length of the partial decryption of one user consists of only two group elements, regardless of the length of the plaintext.

We propose two unidirectional proxy re-encryption schemes from the LWE assumptions. The schemes enjoy key privacy defined by Ateniese, Benson, and Hohenberger (CT-RSA 2009), that is, a delegator and a delegatee of a re-encryption key are anonymous.